The Whys of MMOG Archetypes

heartless_ writes "The decision to use an archetype class system in Vanguard : Saga of Heroes has been met with mixed feelings by the fanbase. Some like it; others dislike it, and still others just don't know what to think. Gamergod has a rundown on what's involved in an archetype system, as well as the pros and cons from both sides of the game's design." From the article: "The balancing of classes is simplified because the system introduces a distinct measurement for comparing classes within an archetype. For example, if the Cleric and the Shaman belong to the archetype whose primary role is to heal, the developers can use this to crunch the numbers and ensure both classes are equal in this ability."

Comments

Personally...

[argStyopa]

I'd love to see a game where the numbers simply aren't available to the players.

Something whose mechanics are derived from Runequest, for example, where every time you try something, you MIGHT succeed and if you do (or even sometimes if you don't) you get better. There's no fixed/limited list of 'talents' available to anyone, although there are some special skills that you can't learn until you reach a certain level of expertise.

You know you're ready to move out of the newbie zone when the creatures you're fighting no longer pose a challenge and the rewards are uninteresting, not because all their names turn green or something.

You know you are a good wall-climber because you've scaled a number of dangerous precipices and survived, not because you're a level 12 rogue and you have the "climb walls" ability.

You know your "inflict agony" spell lasts about 15 seconds because that's what it's done the last five times you've cast it. There was that one creature on whom it only lasted 6 seconds, however....

You know that new sword you got is a sweet one either because you paid to have someone magically investigate it, or more frequently because you killed the last 5 nasties in a single swing, not because the "pluses" are better.

Where is a Darklands MMO?

* truth in commenting note: I don't think this would EVER exist commercially, because not enough people want something that hard. I do think it might be conceivable however to get a CURRENT class-based game to run a mod version where the numbers/details like this are not shown...even that alone would be interesting.

Re:Personally...

[svzurich]

As the City of X devs are learning, players always deduce the numbers and want them provided, and games that provide numbers do not confuse their player base. WoW and EQ2 provide the numbers, and the players are not overwhelmed and perplexed. City of Heroes/Villains is slowly adding numbers, and admiting that hiding them was a bad idea. In CoX Players spend hours on the test server crunching numbers, and then update character planners. Players resent hearing that a power offers a vague amount of damage or resistance, only to find out that the numbers are super low and not worth enhancing. Giving the players more information allows players to make informed decisions with fewer regrets. Most of us hate deleting toons to recreate as we learn how the game really works.

Re:Personally...

[argStyopa]

I played City of Heroes for a year, and I can certainly see your point.
However, I'd argue this is the "Alpha Centauri" effect.

One of the most successful games of all time was Civ, right?
Alpha Centauri, as the sequel to Civ II, should have been a huge hit. It was successful, but what was one of the main complaints? Expectations. See, in Civ, people understood (roughly) what happened when you invented Coinage or Religion. Certainly there were specific game effects/numbers, but in any case you knew "Coinage" probably wasn't going to make your armies tougher, and "religion" wasn't going to do much to protect from earthquakes, for example.

In AC, however, people were developing techs like "anti-physics probulator" or "neutronium psionic pleasure ray" and while you COULD drill down into the game and get the numbers, players were on a very basic level unhappy because they didn't instinctively KNOW what things did.

I'd argue the same for CoH. Is "stupendous blast" more or less damaging than "megaboom punch"?

The more I think about it, a game lacking in numbers can't really just be the same-old, same-old dressed in different clothing. It's got to progress differently, and present the information at LEAST as informatively as real life would.

So for example, Joe Warrior learns the basics of using a sword. He's killing rats left and right, and starting to fight tougher things. The next time he's in town, he's checking with the weapons master who surprises him by saying "you know, I think you're ready to learn some of the more advanced moves. Which would you like to focus on:
- powerful, smashing attacks
- nimble attacks at vital areas
- fighting more than one target at a time
But again, like real life, these aren't exclusive - if you're finding that the powerful, smashing attacks aren't working well against your opponents, go back and learn the others at a cost of time and $$. You'd only LOSE the power attacks skills as they atrophy if you don't use them regularly.

Think about grouping - instead of a metagamey "Let's go do the Instance of Death!" "OK, let's group" "Well, we're all 20th lvl, you're only 10th you'd get slaughtered, so you can't come." it might be more like "Let's do the Instance of Death!" "Think we're ready?" "Sure! Bill and I just killed a minotaur yesterday, and Glenda's fireballs have really been kicking butt." "Can I come? Yesterday I killed some bandits, and didn't have much trouble." "Much trouble?" "Yeah well I died once, but I got them all." "You mean the bandits north of town?" "Yep." "Look, if you had trouble with them, you probably shouldn't. I fought them a couple of weeks ago and they weren't much challenge for me, I think the Instance of Death is going to be quite a bit more difficult."

Which sounds more REAL?

I think it could be done, it would just take more careful planning and effort than most producers would be interested in putting in, when they could just go the well-worn "levels" route and not worry about that part of the game at all.

Therefore....

[acvh]

.... the system just boils down to "Healer", "Fighter", "Thief", etc. Generic RPG. REALLY generic. Plain white box with "RPG" in 24 point type on the front generic.

Archtypes are stupid.... or at least redundant.

[neo]

Did Gandalf cast magic spells because he was a Wizard, or was he a Wizard and hence could cast spells? Was Conan a Barbarian because he didn't wear armour and swung a huge weapon or was he swinging a huge weapon and not wearing armour because he was a Barbarian?

Lazy game designers simply update the last successful thing they find... and that's D&D. Now go back and think about why D&D used classes? Because it was basically a minitures system where all the pieces belonged to classes. Spearman, archers, horsemen... all classes.

Break Free!

Archtypes are boring, stiffling the one thing that MMOGs having going for them which is the ability to make a character that stands out from the crowd. They force players into cliques and alienate others ("sorry we already have a tank")...

How about a system that mimics the real world a little more? How about making your character good at what ever he does... if he goes around swinging a sword... make him a good swordsman. If he tries to cast spells, make him a spellcaster. If he wants to do both, let him, but don't let him be quite as good as someone dedicated to one thing.

I can't wait until MMOGs get what people want:

1. Persistance (When I change the world, the world stays changed)
2. Personality (My character is unique)
3. Psychology (My character isn't insane and won't do stupid things like attack randomly anyone they come across... unless he's psychotic. But that's all done by the character.)

Message me if you want me to explain this further, particularly if you want me to consult on your next game.